SEO is Not Rocket Science, But it is Brain Surgery

Kevin Lee is giving the pot a final stir this year based on his most recent ClickZ article.

To recap the roots of the controversy, my business partner of over 10 years, David Pasternack, touched a nerve recently when he wrote an article for his DMNews column, Troubled Times for SEO Firms, in which he stated, "SEO isn't rocket science."

Apparently, a segment of the SEO blogosphere hopes to continue positioning SEO as just that, perhaps to justify high fees. The debate has sucked in many notable search engine marketing pundits, some claiming PPC search is far from rocket science.

I’ve heard Kevin speak at SES and have ready his columns for quite a while. His advice is usually very logical, but Kevin missed the boat on this one in a very big way.

Many web developers are extremely capable and understand the concept of a visible and easy-to-crawl website. The problem is that they only understand it after we explain it to them through the brain surgery of SEO. Additionally, some developers are in-house employees (or contracted through development firms) who are forced to take direction from traditional marketers who don’t have a clue about search engine visibility (Flash, JavaScript navigation, etc.). So they end up having the most beautiful website that no one has ever seen.

Now let’s discuss the art of proper search engine optimization. The recommendations for keyword focus and execution of a plan to achieve those goals requires significant talent and research that not just anyone can do. Writing solid, captivating web content conducive to rankings also requires a trained copywriter.

And don’t even get me started on Paid Search Management.

So while Kevin has an interesting theory, I’d like to propose my own:

- In theory, anyone can do their own keyword research.
- In theory, anyone can write their own keyword dense content designed for conversion.
- In theory, anyone can host dozens of Web sites; and perform experiments as it relates to visibility and rankings.
- In theory, anyone can analyze months of log files to determine spidering trends followed by a strategy to improve crawl and decrease friction points.
- In theory, anyone can develop a competitive intelligence plan that capitalizes on competitors’ weaknesses.
- In theory, anyone can research a target market analysis to determine user preferences and increase conversion rates.
- In theory, anyone can implement an effective inbound linking strategy.
- In theory, anyone can open a Google Adwords account and start driving traffic to their website with an appropriate keyword bidding strategy.

- But in REALITY, smart companies either hire in-house professionals to manage their search engine marketing or outsource the function to the brain surgeons who live and breathe it.

SEO has been used to describe the keyword research associated with a website, but it encompasses so much more that that (see rant above). I will agree with Pasternack’s article in the sense that an SEO professional/firm that only focuses on keywords will not survive. The industry has most certainly evolved beyond, “you’re #1 on Google.”

Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’m off to get my annual physical from my barber.

Jeremy | permalink | +marktd |

 
To Pay or Not To Pay…Per Post

There was an interesting post from Barry on paying bloggers to review products/services. He does a commendable job of breaking down the benefits of paid blog reviews for the client, the agency and specifically the blogger. And he is sure to note Matt’s recommendation to the NoFollow on any links since they are paid.

SEO Refugee touches on the fact that in many cases, the blogger is asked to review the product/service at no charge and provide a link. Now, this might be a good review, or it could be a flamer. However, they have full editorial discretion and no obligation to write something positive.

Personally, I wouldn’t see an issue with a blogger earning a little scratch for his/her efforts (hint, hint; wink, wink), but how would Google know the difference between the editorial and advertorial? If they find out a blogger has started accepting donations for reviewing a product, does that mean that the entire site will lose credibility?

This morning, I was surprised to read information on getting mentioned in BtoB by courting their Editor, Ellis Booker. This article specifically mentions:

Where you can meet Booker
He sometimes accepts lunch dates in Chicago and in New York. You can also meet him at BtoB’s Netmarketing breakfasts, which he usually moderates. He also attends most of the annual marketing association events, as well as American Business Media events.

ACCEPTS LUNCH DATES???? I’m guessing you’re not Going Dutch.

Make no mistake; I’m NOT bashing BtoB Magazine. They are EXTREMELY reputable, and my guess is that once you captivate Booker’s interest, an article would be legitimate. The point is, if done properly, there no difference between taking an editor to lunch to pitch a story and paying a blogger to review a product.

The value of the post lies squarely in the context of the review. If the review is an honest assessment of the product/service, then everyone wins:

- The reader gets accurate information

- The advertiser gets a link and an opportunity to fix problems

- SEs gets quality content

- The blogger is compensated for time and energy

With Performancing recently acquired, I’d be curious to determine what kinds of procedural changes (if any) arise. What I’d like to see is some type of blogging hierarchy. Specifically, identifying those blogs that prove they can refrain from bias, despite the almighty dollar.

Disclaimer: As of today, MSI has never purchased a Pay Per Post.

Jeremy | permalink | +marktd |

 
Dmoz Doomsday?

Dmoz has been a great tool in the SEO arsenal since the industry was in its infancy. Sure, you have to be meticulous about crafting your link within their guidelines, and you'll probably wait several months before your link is ever seen by an editor. Still, it's probably the most important free directory out there, and if you can get listed it's a great boost for your site's link popularity.

Of course, this is such common SEO advice that there's almost no point in repeating it. Everyone and their mother knows that a Dmoz submission goes right up there with domain name selection when it comes to establishing a website. What they rarely mention is why. Why exactly is Dmoz so bloody important? As it turns out, there are several reasons.

• It's well-ranked. It's got a PageRank of 8, 300,000 inbound links in Google, two million in MSN, and over 10 million in Yahoo. Even its innermost subdirectories maintain respectable measures of importance. Few other directories can hold a candle to it.
• Search engines trust it. Dmoz is often used to generate search result snippets, so much so, in fact, that the search engines instituted a new meta tag to let webmasters say when not to use it. That sort of trust doesn't come easily.
• Everyone likes to copy it. Dmoz is so deep and detailed that dozens of other directories simply duplicate its listings. Heck, even Google does it. And while none of these other directories have anywhere near the weight of the original, they still amount to a lot of link distribution with minimal effort. Send in the clones.

For the past few months, however, Dmoz has been flatlining. New submissions and editorial access have been down since late October due to a large-scale hardware failure. Yes, you read that correctly; it's been inactive for seven weeks, with nary a word being spoken by the admins as to when it might come back up.

So should we give up on Dmoz? Given the issues it had with editors even before it went down, should we turn to a more collaborative solution like the good folks over at SEOmoz have suggested? Is Dmoz on its death bed waiting for a new directory model to carry the torch as cofounder Rich Skrenta says?

I'm all for new solutions. If someone develops a new ODP that works better, I'll definitely be adding it to my directory submission checklist.

Still, I'm not about to disregard Dmoz. As all the points above indicate, there's plenty of value in a Dmoz listing. More importantly, it's the sort of value that isn't developed overnight. Even if Dmoz loses some value as a result of this extended outage, it'll still be well worth the effort to submit. Heck, even if they lose so many editors that I only have a 10% chance of getting reviewed in the first year, I'll still be submitting. There's just too much potential value to ignore.

Besides, this isn't the first Dmoz doomsday by a long shot. Dmoz has had plenty of problems in the past and always seems to recover. I wouldn't be surprised if we end up looking back on the "Great Dmoz Outage of '06" as just another violent hiccup.

Update: According to the Dmoz website, editorial access has been restored but everything else (like the site submission form) is still down. This definitely comes as welcome news, although not all we were hoping for. My guess is that editors are being let in first to whittle down the submission backlog, after which everything will be reactivated. Who knows? Maybe Dmoz is in for a happy New Year after all.

Stephen Ward | permalink | +marktd |

 
Social Marketing--Does it work?
Now before all you social marketers jump down my throat, let me clarify.

I read about 20 marketing blogs per day...repeatedly. I see all kinds of theories on ideas for how to use social marketing to build awareness and drive business for a website. Here is the latest.

What I don't see is someone providing before and after case studies that prove effectiveness. As much as Chili's having a MySpace page is interesting, prove to me that it makes an impression on how many Jalepeno Poppers they sell.

Someone please prove that this works. I'm currently, but officially unconvinced.
Jeremy | permalink | +marktd |

 
Still don't think it's important to have a blog presence?
Then you probably also think that just being #1 on Google will make you a millionaire.

In all seriousness, I wanted to share an outstanding example of why companies need to let their opinions be known on the web. This doesn't refer specifically to having your own blog, but to participate within your space.

SEOmoz has a great post discussing competiting link brokers. The topic is a great one, but that's not what really impresses me. Text Link Broker's fearless leader Jarrod Hunt did a fantastic job of positioning himself and fending off us SEO wolves.

Rand was bringing up an important topic, and Jarrod somehow managed to politely lead the conversation. The end result was a wonderful press opportunity for TLB at center stage in front of a hyper-relavent target market. He was able to repeatedly present his company's unique value proposition as a legitimate, consultative link partner.

Admittedly, it's a ballsy move to put yourself out there. However, if you are willing to stand behind your product and answer the tough questions, there is a big payoff.

Jeremy | permalink | +marktd |